Most of the high end Android phones will have the ability to reach 128GB and even higher this year. Some may already allow that now. Granted you have to use a SD card to reach that but not really that big of a deal. Apple really doesn't have much of a choice to offer 128GB as well. I am just surprised it took this long.
And people ignorant of astronomy are surprised when others know how to calculate a lunar eclipse.
No evidence of iOS getting a pointer (mouse) capability, access to external HDDs, printers, and whatever other drivers that are expected from a notebook PC.
If Apple does go with an ARM-based notebook it would be an ARM version of Mac OS X and likely would be a different line of machine because the performance disparity between ARM and the comparatively super-fast Core chips in the MBAs.
Given that the Microsoft Surface Pro is running a Full Desktop Operating System, NOT merely a mobile one limited to only mobile apps, the iPad (in any capacity) is hardly a direct competitor to most (logical-thinking) consumers.
Yes, and not only that: if Apple discards (as it seems to be the case) adding touch capabilities to OSX running on a tablet with MacBook Air specs, that will be yet another step on the direction of leaving the computer industry and becoming a 100% toy maker. Since I need computers, I'm already preparing my move to Linux. It won't happen in the short term, but, honestly, I don't see OSX staying as a top OS ten years from now.
Not everything needs to be innovative. Some things are okay just being good. Like my pen, it's not innovative, but it's good- and that's the way I like it. How about a phone with 128gb storage, it's not innovative, but it's good. Simply because Apple over the past three decades has essentially designed the modern computer, mouse input, modern smartphone, modern tablet, modern "Ultrabook" (aka macbook air ripoff), modern magic mousepad/multitouch, and spurred the popularization of speech-input as a method of data input, does NOT mean every single product change they make is a failure because it does not live up to the caliber of kickass that Apple has set.
Speaking of which, who the hell is doing better?
Hate all you want, but Apple makes excellent products with far better build quality and durability and functionality than its peers. Its not like others are taking the place of Apple's true innovation, Samsung is just riding its wake and changing little specs here or there that a certain percentage of people prefer over the single(ish) iPhone design/size.
Yes, Apple charges a premium. It's a goddamn business! They make money. Apple charges more for an objectively better piece of hardware and more user friendly and fluid interface (see iOS vs. all others and OSX vs. umm... XP, Vista, windows 8, windows 7 was alright but it was essentially XP with OSX features. There's something called VALUE in the world. instead of just looking at price, look at price and what it buys you. $1 spent on an apple product will buy me more than $1 spent on a windows or android product. And hell, i've had the iphone since the very first. do you all remember dumbphones? pre-iphone era "smartphones?" It's easily the most useful tool I have ever possessed.
Yes, android is catching up and has cool features, but user interface and friendliness are much better on Apple products. It likely won't pass it because it uses iPhone as a guide.
My history of electronics:
Dell desktop> HP desktop-> Toshiba laptop-> LG phone-> Japanese keitei (lived there 2006, at the time they were watching TV and starting their cars on their phones)-> Origional iPhone-> Homebuilt windows machine-> iPhone 3GS -> iPhone 4S -> Macbook air
My macbook air is faster than my decked out crazy ram desktop because it doesn't have damn windows bloatware on it, it runs OSX (which I now love), and it's solid state memory. I've played around with androids, they've got some cool features but they're clunky, they NEED the ram they scream about in spec wars because android is a less efficient system. And apple products last longer, especially if you take care of them.
About time. In the age of e-books from iBook Author, 16 GB is simply just not enough. The smallest one can be half a Gig in size.
64GB, you mean?
---- @DaHarder: you should change your name to TryHarder. Well, actually you should Work Smarter, but it doesn't look like that is something we could expect.
Is this news already?
Same iPad with more storage.....
Very innovative....
Not necessarily-
This has been my thought all along- If they end up releasing another iPad this spring/early summer, it will be the new redesigned model- similar to iPad mini. Although, my argument has always been- what else could they possibly add to it? It already has the A6X, retina, 1gb ram, hd FaceTime, lightning, and a 5mp camera.
What are they gonna do, just redesign and that's it? If they doubled the storage at the same price and only offered 32, 64, 128- that would make the most sense with the redesign in terms of value added.
Now, if they don't release until the fall, an A7x redesign will be more than adequate and they'll keep pricing as is and add 128 to the top.
To your point- there is no way to "innovate" the iPad at this point. It, in itself, was the innovation. Now it can simply evolve. And it they shave .3 pounds off of it, and keep the same or better battery life- that would be amazing.
Given that the Microsoft Surface Pro is running a Full Desktop Operating System, NOT merely a mobile one limited to only mobile apps, the iPad (in any capacity) is hardly a direct competitor to most (logical-thinking) consumers.
According to your specification, most consumer seem to belong to the non-logical-thinking category. As it has become very clear the iPad has become a surprisingly (to me at least) strong competitor to any portable computer. Most dominantly the netbooks, which still run a so called Full Desktop OS.
Logically you may have some points, but the reality shows quiet a different picture.
Most of the high end Android phones will have the ability to reach 128GB and even higher this year. Some may already allow that now. Granted you have to use a SD card to reach that but not really that big of a deal. Apple really doesn't have much of a choice to offer 128GB as well. I am just surprised it took this long.
Yes, especially in the iPad and iPod touch, where there's more room for memory chips.
The iPhone only has space for one Flash chip, so it has to wait for Samsung et al to cram more memory into a single package.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
People on MacRumors are claiming this is just to get the ASP up on the iPad. Once again no matter what Apple does someone's going to be cynical about it.
Nothing cynical about the truth. People here have made similar comments about using high end memory to get the ASP (and average profit margin) up.
Try looking at it in a more rational way. Assume Apple will want to make the profit margin for the iPhone product category and they know they will sell x-many 32GB models to every y-many 64GB models. You end up with the low-end model being too low so the high-end model has to make up the difference.
All new iOS devices are more than ready for a new increase in standard storage. I think 32GB should be the new minimum. Actually, I think they should've started doing it when the iPhone 4 Retina hit the market. Since Retina displays have come, storage space isn't what it used to be.
At the very minimum, Apple needs to start getting realistic with storage capacity pricing. Microsoft is only charging $100 for a bump from 64GB to 128GB in the Surface Pro. Most other companies are only charging around $50 per increase size (doubling). Meanwhile, Apple is charging $200 for a wimpy additional 48GB (16GB to 64GB).
Since Apple bought out that company from Israel that specializes in maximizing the performance of cheap(er) flash storage, the can't be using anything that's really expensive.
Why not just offer a model with a microSD slot and be done with the incremental bumps? Seems like Apple just keeps spinning their wheels on new hardware designs - thinner and faster seems like their big innovations lately. Sure those are nice attributes but just because somethings pretty to look and hold, it doesn't help if it slips right out of your hand because it's smooth. It didn't take but 3 days before my mini slipped out of my hands because it's so slick (before I could get a decent case for it).
I think that's a good idea. They should remove the 16gb option and start the upcoming rumored ipad mini retina with 32gb at $329 and start the thinner and lighter ipad 5 with 32gb of storage at $499. Also Apple should start the iphone 5s with 32gb at $199 on contract and remove the 16gb option altogether.
All new iOS devices are more than ready for a new increase in standard storage. I think 32GB should be the new minimum. Actually, I think they should've started doing it when the iPhone 4 Retina hit the market. Since Retina displays have come, storage space isn't what it used to be.
At the very minimum, Apple needs to start getting realistic with storage capacity pricing. Microsoft is only charging $100 for a bump from 64GB to 128GB in the Surface Pro. Most other companies are only charging around $50 per increase size (doubling). Meanwhile, Apple is charging $200 for a wimpy additional 48GB (16GB to 64GB).
Since Apple bought out that company from Israel that specializes in maximizing the performance of cheap(er) flash storage, the can't be using anything that's really expensive.
Who defines "not really expensive"? Do you think that 64 GB (or 128 GB) flash chips are cheap - even if you use the Israeli technology? It can't work magic.
Maybe Apple EOLs the iPod classic and finally loads the iPod touch with enough memory?
"Enough" according to whom? Since the 16 GB devices appear to be the best sellers right now, I would say that the market has determined that 16 GB is plenty for an entry level device.
Why not just offer a model with a microSD slot and be done with the incremental bumps?
For the same reasons that have been given the last few million times someone asked that question:
1. Reliability. MicroSD cards and slots are not as reliable as built in flash. Not only does that degrade the customer's experience, but it causes support problems for Apple. Google "microsd reliability" for tons of examples.
2. Dirt can easily enter through the slot.
3. Any opening in the case and extra slots require stiffening and support devices - which adds to the weight and cost.
If you want a cheap, unreliable phone, you're free to buy one. Just don't expect Apple to put cheap crap in your phone.
Comments
And people ignorant of astronomy are surprised when others know how to calculate a lunar eclipse.
That isn't happening and here's why:
That seems like the reasonable step for the next iPad.
Same iPad with more storage.....
Very innovative....
Not everything needs to be innovative. Some things are okay just being good. Like my pen, it's not innovative, but it's good- and that's the way I like it. How about a phone with 128gb storage, it's not innovative, but it's good. Simply because Apple over the past three decades has essentially designed the modern computer, mouse input, modern smartphone, modern tablet, modern "Ultrabook" (aka macbook air ripoff), modern magic mousepad/multitouch, and spurred the popularization of speech-input as a method of data input, does NOT mean every single product change they make is a failure because it does not live up to the caliber of kickass that Apple has set.
Speaking of which, who the hell is doing better?
Hate all you want, but Apple makes excellent products with far better build quality and durability and functionality than its peers. Its not like others are taking the place of Apple's true innovation, Samsung is just riding its wake and changing little specs here or there that a certain percentage of people prefer over the single(ish) iPhone design/size.
Yes, Apple charges a premium. It's a goddamn business! They make money. Apple charges more for an objectively better piece of hardware and more user friendly and fluid interface (see iOS vs. all others and OSX vs. umm... XP, Vista, windows 8, windows 7 was alright but it was essentially XP with OSX features. There's something called VALUE in the world. instead of just looking at price, look at price and what it buys you. $1 spent on an apple product will buy me more than $1 spent on a windows or android product. And hell, i've had the iphone since the very first. do you all remember dumbphones? pre-iphone era "smartphones?" It's easily the most useful tool I have ever possessed.
Yes, android is catching up and has cool features, but user interface and friendliness are much better on Apple products. It likely won't pass it because it uses iPhone as a guide.
My history of electronics:
Dell desktop> HP desktop-> Toshiba laptop-> LG phone-> Japanese keitei (lived there 2006, at the time they were watching TV and starting their cars on their phones)-> Origional iPhone-> Homebuilt windows machine-> iPhone 3GS -> iPhone 4S -> Macbook air
My macbook air is faster than my decked out crazy ram desktop because it doesn't have damn windows bloatware on it, it runs OSX (which I now love), and it's solid state memory. I've played around with androids, they've got some cool features but they're clunky, they NEED the ram they scream about in spec wars because android is a less efficient system. And apple products last longer, especially if you take care of them.
64GB, you mean?
----
@DaHarder: you should change your name to TryHarder. Well, actually you should Work Smarter, but it doesn't look like that is something we could expect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07
About time. In the age of e-books from iBook Author, 16 GB is simply just not enough. The smallest one can be half a Gig in size.
16GB ?
Your post must be from 07.
This has been my thought all along- If they end up releasing another iPad this spring/early summer, it will be the new redesigned model- similar to iPad mini. Although, my argument has always been- what else could they possibly add to it? It already has the A6X, retina, 1gb ram, hd FaceTime, lightning, and a 5mp camera.
What are they gonna do, just redesign and that's it? If they doubled the storage at the same price and only offered 32, 64, 128- that would make the most sense with the redesign in terms of value added.
Now, if they don't release until the fall, an A7x redesign will be more than adequate and they'll keep pricing as is and add 128 to the top.
To your point- there is no way to "innovate" the iPad at this point. It, in itself, was the innovation. Now it can simply evolve. And it they shave .3 pounds off of it, and keep the same or better battery life- that would be amazing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder
Given that the Microsoft Surface Pro is running a Full Desktop Operating System, NOT merely a mobile one limited to only mobile apps, the iPad (in any capacity) is hardly a direct competitor to most (logical-thinking) consumers.
According to your specification, most consumer seem to belong to the non-logical-thinking category. As it has become very clear the iPad has become a surprisingly (to me at least) strong competitor to any portable computer. Most dominantly the netbooks, which still run a so called Full Desktop OS.
Logically you may have some points, but the reality shows quiet a different picture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac
Most of the high end Android phones will have the ability to reach 128GB and even higher this year. Some may already allow that now. Granted you have to use a SD card to reach that but not really that big of a deal. Apple really doesn't have much of a choice to offer 128GB as well. I am just surprised it took this long.
Yes, especially in the iPad and iPod touch, where there's more room for memory chips.
The iPhone only has space for one Flash chip, so it has to wait for Samsung et al to cram more memory into a single package.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
People on MacRumors are claiming this is just to get the ASP up on the iPad. Once again no matter what Apple does someone's going to be cynical about it.
Nothing cynical about the truth. People here have made similar comments about using high end memory to get the ASP (and average profit margin) up.
For example, just recently, this post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Try looking at it in a more rational way. Assume Apple will want to make the profit margin for the iPhone product category and they know they will sell x-many 32GB models to every y-many 64GB models. You end up with the low-end model being too low so the high-end model has to make up the difference.
dup
Exactly. It is obvious that at some point, Apple will offer 128 GB iDevices.
Nice straw man argument. No one ever said it was innovative.
All new iOS devices are more than ready for a new increase in standard storage. I think 32GB should be the new minimum. Actually, I think they should've started doing it when the iPhone 4 Retina hit the market. Since Retina displays have come, storage space isn't what it used to be.
At the very minimum, Apple needs to start getting realistic with storage capacity pricing. Microsoft is only charging $100 for a bump from 64GB to 128GB in the Surface Pro. Most other companies are only charging around $50 per increase size (doubling). Meanwhile, Apple is charging $200 for a wimpy additional 48GB (16GB to 64GB).
Since Apple bought out that company from Israel that specializes in maximizing the performance of cheap(er) flash storage, the can't be using anything that's really expensive.
Maybe Apple EOLs the iPod classic and finally loads the iPod touch with enough memory?
What's the next big leap? Software?
Who defines "not really expensive"? Do you think that 64 GB (or 128 GB) flash chips are cheap - even if you use the Israeli technology? It can't work magic.
"Enough" according to whom? Since the 16 GB devices appear to be the best sellers right now, I would say that the market has determined that 16 GB is plenty for an entry level device.
For the same reasons that have been given the last few million times someone asked that question:
1. Reliability. MicroSD cards and slots are not as reliable as built in flash. Not only does that degrade the customer's experience, but it causes support problems for Apple. Google "microsd reliability" for tons of examples.
2. Dirt can easily enter through the slot.
3. Any opening in the case and extra slots require stiffening and support devices - which adds to the weight and cost.
If you want a cheap, unreliable phone, you're free to buy one. Just don't expect Apple to put cheap crap in your phone.